Genetics From Genes to Genomes 6th Edition hartwell Solutions Manual

3-1
Copyright © 2018 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior
written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
chapter
3
Extensions to Mendel’s Laws
Synopsis
In Chapter 3, we see that the relationship between genotype and phenotype can be more
complicated than envisaged by Mendel. Alleles do not have to be completely dominant or
recessive with respect to each other. Not all genotypes are equally viable. Genes can have more
than two alleles in a population. One gene can govern more than one phenotype. A single
phenotype can be influenced by more than one gene, and these genes can interact in a variety of
ways.
Despite these complications, the alleles of individual genes still segregate according to
Mendel’s Law of Segregation, and different pairs of genes still usually behave as dictated by
Mendel’s Law of Independent Assortment.
Key terms
wild-type alleles – alleles with a frequency of greater than 1% in the population.
Colloquially, wild-type alleles are the normal alleles found most commonly in the
population.
mutant alleles – rare alleles with a frequency of less than 1% in the population.
monomorphic gene – a gene with only one common, wild-type allele.
polymorphic gene – a gene with many wild-type alleles. The wild-type alleles of a
polymorphic gene are often called common variants.
incomplete dominance and codominance – cases in which the phenotype of
heterozygotes is different than that of either type of homozygote. Incomplete
dominance describes alleles where the heterozygote has a phenotype in between
that of either homozygote, while heterozygotes for codominant alleles have both of
the phenotypes associated with each homozygote. Usually in incomplete dominance
one allele is nonfunctional or only partially functional, while in codominance both
alleles are fully functional.
recessive lethal allele – an allele (usually a loss-of-function allele) of an essential gene
necessary to the survival of the individual. A zygote homozygous for a recessive
lethal allele cannot survive and thus is not detected among the progeny of a cross.
dominance series of multiple alleles – Although each individual has only two alleles
of a gene, many alleles of the gene may exist in the population. These alleles may be
completely dominant, incompletely dominant, or codominant with respect to each
other as determined by the phenotype of heterozygotes for the particular pair.
pleiotropy – A gene may affect more than one phenotype.
epistasis – An allele of one gene hides the effects of different alleles at a second gene.
Genetics From Genes to Genomes 6th Edition hartwell Solutions Manual
Full Download: https://alibabadownload.com/product/genetics-from-genes-to-genomes-6th-edition-hartwell-solutions-manual/
This sample only, Download all chapters at: AlibabaDownload.com

chapter 3
3-
2
redundant genes – Two or more genes provide the same function.
penetrance – the fraction of individuals with a particular genotype who display the
genotype’s characteristic phenotype.
expressivity – the degree to which an affected individual displays the phenotype
associated with that individual’s genotype. Expressivity of a genotype can vary due
to environment, chance, and alleles of other genes (modifier genes).
conditional mutation – a change in the base sequence of a gene that affects gene
function only under specific environmental conditions.
continuous (quantitative) trait – a trait whose phenotype varies over a wide range of
values that can be measured. Continuous traits are polygenic – they are controlled
by the combined activities of many genes.
locus heterogeneity – exhibited by a trait where mutation in any one of two or more
genes results in the same mutant phenotype.
complementation test – method of discovering whether two mutations are in the
same or separate genes. Two mutant strains with the same mutant phenotype are
crossed. If the progeny are all wild type, complementation occurred and the
strains had mutations in different genes. If instead the progeny of this cross are all
mutant, no complementation occurred and the strains had mutations in the same
gene.
Exceptions to the 3:1 Mendelian monohybrid ratio
1:2:1 – Ratio of progeny genotypes and phenotypes in a cross between hybrids when
there is incomplete dominance or codominance:
(Aa × Aa → 1 AA : 2 Aa : 1aa)
Note that in incomplete dominance and codominance, a new (third) phenotype will
appear in the hybrids (Aa) of the F1 generation. In the F2 generation, this same
phenotype must be the largest component of the 1:2:1 monohybrid ratio.
2:1 – Ratio of progeny phenotypes observed in a cross between hybrids when one allele
is a recessive lethal allele that has a dominant effect on a visible phenotype:
(Aa × Aa → 1 AA : 2Aa : 1aa)
Note that in this case, homozygotes for the recessive lethal allele A die (red color),
but Aa heterozygotes have a phenotype different from aa homozygotes.
Interactions of two genes
You should be able to recognize traits influenced by two genes as variations on the
9:3:3:1 ratio of genotypic classes resulting from a dihybrid cross. For your convenience,
an abbreviated version of Table 3.2 summarizing these gene interactions is presented at
the top of the next page. It is particularly useful to understand the concepts of
additivity, epistasis, redundancy, and complementation.

chapter 3
3-
3
If you are given the details of a biochemical pathway, you should be able to work out
the ratios of phenotypes expected among the progeny of a cross. Note that you cannot
go in the opposite direction: A particular ratio does not tell much about the underlying
biochemistry. Thus, you should NOT try to memorize specific examples relating
particular ratios to specific biochemical pathways. Instead, think about each problem
from the ground up each time.
F2 Genotypic Ratios from an
F1 Dihybrid Cross
Gene interaction A- B- A- bb aa B- aa bb
F2 Phenotypic
Ratio
Additive: Four distinct F2
phenotypes
9 3 3 1 9:3:3:1
Recessive epistasis:
Homozygous recessive allele of
one gene masks both alleles of
another gene
9 3 3 1 9:3:4
Reciprocal recessive epistasis:
When homozygous, recessive
alleles of each gene mask the
dominant allele of the other gene
9 3 3 1 9:7
Dominant epistasis I: Dominant
allele of one gene hides effects of
both alleles of other gene
9 3 3 1 12:3:1
Dominant epistasis II: Dominant
allele of one gene hides effects of
dominant allele of other gene
9 3 3 1 13:3
Redundancy: Only one dominant
allele of either of two genes is
necessary to produce phenotype
9 3 3 1 15:1
Problem Solving
In Chapter 2, the major goal was to determine which allele of a gene is dominant and which is
recessive, and then to ascribe genotypes to various individuals or classes of individuals based on
the ratio of progeny types seen in a cross. The challenges become more difficult in this chapter,
but the first step in problem solving remains the same: You need to DIAGRAM THE CROSS
in a consistent manner. The next steps are to answer the following questions:
How many genes are involved in determining the phenotype?
How many alleles of each gene are present?
What phenotypes are associated with which genotypic classes? (The answer to this last
question will help you understand the dominance relationships between the alleles of
each gene and the interactions between alleles of traits determined by more than one
gene.)
The points listed below will be particularly helpful in guiding your problem solving:

chapter 3
3-
4
 To distinguish between one gene and two gene traits, look for the number of
phenotypic classes in the F2 generation and the ratios in the F2s among those classes.
If a single gene is involved, there will be either two classes (3:1, or 2:1 if an allele is a
recessive lethal) or three classes (1:2:1 in the cases of codominance or incomplete
dominance). If two genes are involved, you could see two classes (9:7, 13:3, or 15:1)
or three classes (9:3:4 or 12:3:1) or four classes (9:3:3:1). (Note: These ratios require
that the P generation is true-breeding and that the F1 crosses examined are between
monohybrids or dihybrids.)
 Understand that when there is codominance or incomplete dominance, a novel
phenotype will appear in the F1 generation. In the F2 generation, this same
phenotype must be the largest component of the 1:2:1 monohybrid ratio.
 If you see a series of crosses involving different phenotypes for a certain trait like
coat color, and each cross gives a monohybrid ratio (3:1 or 1:2:1), then all the
phenotypes are controlled by one gene with many alleles that form an allelic series.
You should write out the dominance hierarchy for this series (e.g., a = b > c) to keep
track of the relationships among the alleles.
 Lethal alleles are almost always recessive because a zygote with a dominant lethal
allele could not grow into an adult. (The only exceptions to this rule involve
conditional lethal alleles that survive in some environments but not others.) On
the basis of what you have learned in this chapter, you can recognize recessive lethal
alleles if they are pleiotropic and show a dominant visible phenotype such that the
monohybrid phenotypic ratio is 2 (dominant phenotype) : 1 (recessive phenotype).
 Remember that the 9:3:3:1 dihybrid ratio and its variants represent various
combinations of the genotypic classes 9 A– B– : 3 A– bb : 3 aa B– : 1 aa bb, where
the dash indicates either a dominant or recessive allele. Based on the observed
ratios, you should be able to tell which genotypic classes correspond to which
phenotypes. Although you should not memorize the table on the previous page
displaying these variants of 9:3:3:1, you should be able to consider whether particular
biochemical explanations fit the ratios seen.
 Don’t forget to use the product rule of probability to determine the proportions of
genotypes or phenotypes for independently assorting genes.
 Sometimes genotypes and phenotypes share similar symbols. To distinguish these
usages, remember that in this book genotypes are always in italics (i.e., Rh+
), while
phenotypes are written in Roman script (i.e., Rh+
).
Vocabulary
1.
a. epistasis 2. the alleles of one gene mask the effects of alleles of
another gene
b. modifier genes 5. genes whose alleles alter phenotypes produced by the

chapter 3
3-
5
action of other genes
c. conditional lethal 10. a genotype that is lethal in some situations (for
example, high temperature) but viable in others
d. permissive 7. environmental condition that allows conditional
conditions lethals to live
e. reduced 6. less than 100% of the individuals possessing a
penetrance particular genotype express it in their phenotype
f. multifactorial trait 8. a trait produced by the interaction of alleles of at
least two genes or from interactions between gene
and environment
g. incomplete 11. the heterozygote resembles neither homozygote
dominance
h. codominance 3. both parental phenotypes are expressed in the F1
hybrids
i. mutation 4. a heritable change in a gene
j. pleiotropy 1. one gene affecting more than one phenotype
k. variable 9. individuals with the same genotype have related
expressivity phenotypes that vary in intensity
Section 3.1
2. The problem states that the intermediate pink phenotype is caused by incomplete
dominance for the alleles of a single gene. We suggest that you employ genotype
symbols that can show the lack of complete dominance; the obvious R for red and r for
white does not reflect the complexity of this situation. In such cases we recommend
using a base letter as the gene symbol and then employing superscripts to show the
different alleles. To avoid any possible misinterpretations, it is always advantageous to
include a separate statement making the complexities of the dominant/recessive
complications clear.
Designate the two alleles Fr = red and Fw = white, so the possible genotypes are
FrFr = red; FrFw = pink; and FwFw = white. Note that the phenotypic ratio is the
same as the genotypic ratio in incomplete dominance.
a. Diagram the cross: FrFw × FrFw → 1/4 FrFr (red) : 1/2 FrFw (pink) : 1/4
FwFw (white).
b. FwFw × FrFw → 1/2 FrFw (pink) : 1/2 FwFw (white).
c. FrFr × FrFr → 1 FrFr (red).
d. FrFr × FrFw → 1/2 FrFr (red) : 1/2 FrFw (pink).
e. FwFw × FwFw → 1 FwFw (white).

chapter 3
3-
6
f. FrFr × FwFw → 1 FrFw (pink).
The cross shown in part (f) is the most efficient way to produce pink flowers, because
all the progeny will be pink.
3. In Mendel’s Pp heterozygotes, the amount of enzyme leading to purple pigment
is sufficient to produce purple color as intense as the purple color in PP
homozygotes. Presumably the heterozygote has enough enzyme P so that the maximal
level of purple pigment is produced; more enzyme cannot make more purple pigment.
In the snapdragons in Fig. 3.3, the amount of red pigment in the Aa heterozygote is
less than that in the AA homozygote. Presumably here, the amount of enzyme A
catalyzing the production of the red pigment in the heterozygotes is insufficient to
produce the maximum level of the red pigment seen in the AA homozygote. That is, in
the case of this snapdragon gene, the intensity of the phenotype is proportional to
the dosage of functional alleles (1 dose in the Aa heterozygote; 2 doses in the AA
homozygote). In such cases of incomplete dominance, it is usually assumed that AA
has twice as much of the protein product of the gene as does Aa, if a is a null allele.
4. Presumably, because r is nonfunctional, RR peas have twice the number of Sbe1 protein
molecules as Rr peas, while rr peas have zero Sbe1 protein molecules. If we describe the
phenotype as the number of Sbe1 molecules, the R and r alleles would exhibit
incomplete dominance because the phenotype of the heterozygote is in between that
of dominant and recessive homozygotes.
5. a. Diagram the cross:
e+e+ × e+e → 1/2 e+e+ : 1/2 e+e.
The trident marking is only found in the heterozygotes, so the probability is 1/2.
b. The offspring with the trident marking are e+e, so the cross is e+e × e+e → 1/4 ee
: 1/2 e+e : 1/4 e+e+. Therefore, of 300 offspring, 75 should have ebony bodies,
150 should have the trident marking and 75 should have honey-colored
bodies.
6. Diagram the cross:
yellow × yellow → 38 yellow : 22 red : 20 white
Three phenotypes in the progeny indicate that the yellow parents are not true-breeding.
The ratio of the progeny is close to 1/2 : 1/4 : 1/4. This is the result expected for
crosses between individuals heterozygous for incompletely dominant alleles. Thus:
CrCw × CrCw → 1/2 CrCw (yellow) : 1/4 CrCr (red) : 1/4 CCw (white).
7. A cross between individuals heterozygous for incompletely dominant alleles of a gene
give a ratio of 1/4 (one homozygote) : 1/2 (heterozygote with the same phenotype as
the parents) : 1/4 (other homozygote). Because the problem already states which
genotypes correspond to which phenotypes, you know that the color gene will give a
monohybrid phenotypic ratio of 1/4 red : 1/2 purple : 1/4 white, while the shape gene
will give a monohybrid phenotypic ratio of 1/4 long : 1/2 oval : 1/4 round.
Because the inheritance of these two genes is independent, use the product rule to
generate all the possible phenotype combinations (note that there will be 3 × 3 = 9

chapter 3
3-
7
classes) and their probabilities, thus generating the dihybrid phenotypic ratio for two
incompletely dominant genes: 1/16 red long : 1/8 red oval : 1/16 red round : 1/8
purple long : 1/4 purple oval : 1/8 purple round : 1/16 white long : 1/8 white oval
: 1/16 white round. As an example, to determine the probability of red long progeny,
multiply 1/4 (probability of red) × 1/4 (probability of long) = 1/16. If you have trouble
keeping track of the 9 possible classes, it may be helpful to list the classes in the form of
a branch diagram (not shown) or a table as follows:
Phenotype Probability of phenotype
red, long 1/4 × 1/4 = 1/16
red, oval 1/4 × 1/2 = 1/8
red, round 1/4 × 1/4 = 1/16
purple, long 1/2 × 1/4 = 1/8
purple, oval 1/2 × 1/2 = 1/4
purple, round 1/2 × 1/4 = 1/8
white, long 1/4 × 1/4 = 1/16
white, oval 1/4 × 1/2 = 1/8
white, round 1/4 × 1/4 = 1/16
8. The cross is: white long × purple short → 301 long purple : 99 short purple : 612
long pink : 195 short pink : 295 long white : 98 short white.
Deconstruct this dihybrid phenotypic ratio for two genes into separate constituent
monohybrid ratios for each of the 2 traits: flower color and pod length. For flower
color note that there are 3 phenotypes: 301 + 99 purple : 612 +195 pink : 295 + 98
white = 400 purple : 807 pink : 393 white = 1/4 purple : 1/2 pink : 1/4 white. This is a
typical monohybrid ratio for incompletely dominant alleles, so flower color is caused
by incompletely dominant alleles of a gene, with CP
giving purple when
homozygous, CW
giving white when homozygous, and the CP
CW
heterozygotes
giving pink.
For pod length, the phenotypic ratio is (301 + 612 + 295) long : (99 + 195 + 98)
short = 1208 long : 392 short = 3/4 long : 1/4 short. This 3:1 ratio is that expected for
a cross between individuals heterozygous for a gene in which one allele is completely
dominant to the other, so pod shape is controlled by a single gene with the long
allele (L) completely dominant to the short allele (l).
9. Remember that the gene determining ABO blood groups has 3 alleles and that IA = IB
> i.
a. The O phenotype means the girl’s genotype is ii. Each parent contributed an i allele,
so her parents could be ii (O) or IAi (A) or IBi (B) in any combination.

chapter 3
3-
8
b. A person with the B phenotype could have either genotype IBIB or genotype IBi.
The mother is A and thus could not have contributed an IB allele to this daughter.
Instead, because the daughter clearly does not have an IA allele, the mother must
have contributed the i allele to this daughter. The mother must have been an IAi
heterozygote. The father must have contributed the IB allele to his daughter, so he
could be either IBIB, IBi, or IBIA.
c. The genotypes of the girl and her mother must both be IAIB. The father must
contribute either the IA or the IB allele, so there is only one phenotype and
genotype which would exclude a man as her father − the O phenotype (genotype
ii).
10. To approach this problem, look at the mother/child combinations to determine what
alleles the father must have contributed to each child’s genotype.
a. The father had to contribute IB, N, and Rh− alleles to the child. The only male
fitting these requirements is male d whose phenotype is B, MN, and Rh+ (note
that the father must be Rh+Rh− because the daughter is Rh−; the same is true of
the mother).
b. The father had to contribute i, N, and Rh− alleles. The father could be either male c
(O MN Rh+) or male d (B MN Rh+). As we saw previously, male d is the only
male fitting the requirements for the father in part (a). Assuming one child per male
as instructed by the problem, the father in part (b) must be male c.
c. The father had to contribute IA, M, and Rh− alleles. Only male b (A M Rh+) fits
these criteria. (Note that the father must be Rh+Rh−.)
d. The father had to contribute either IB or i, M, and Rh−. Three males have the alleles
required: these are male a, male c, and male d. However, of these three possibilities,
only male a remains unassigned to a mother/child pair.
11. Designate the alleles: pm (marbled) > ps (spotted) = pd (dotted) > pc (clear).
a. Diagram the crosses:
1. pmpm (homozygous marbled) × psps (spotted) → pmps (marbled F1)
2. pdpd × pcpc → pdpc (dotted F1)
3. pmps × pdpc → 1/4 pmpd (marbled) : 1/4 pmpc (marbled) : 1/4 pspd
(spotted dotted) : 1/4 pspc (spotted) = 1/4 spotted dotted : 1/2
marbled : 1/4 spotted.
b. The F1 from cross 1 are marbled (pmps) from the first cross and dotted (pdpc)
from the second cross as shown in part (a).
12. Suppose, as maintained by your fellow student, that spotting is due to the action of one
gene with alleles S (spotting) and s (no spots), and that dotting is due to the action of a
second gene with alleles D (dotting) and d (no spots). The cross series shown in Fig.

chapter 3
3-
9
3.4a, starting with true-breeding spotted and true-breeding dotted strains, could then be
diagrammed as:
SS dd × ss DD → Ss Dd (spotted and dotted F1) → F2 consisting of 9 S– D–
(spotted and dotted) : 3 S– dd (spotted, not dotted) : 3 ss D– (not spotted, dotted) : 1
ss dd (not spotted, not dotted)
Thus, the alternative hypothesis suggested by your fellow student would predict that
some lentils would be found in the F2 generation that would be neither spotted nor
dotted. The results shown in Fig. 3.4 do not include any such lentils. If you counted a
large number of F2 individuals and you failed to see lentils that were neither
spotted nor dotted, you would be able to exclude the hypothesis that two genes
were involved.
13. a. All the crosses have results that can be explained by one gene − either a 3:1
phenotypic monohybrid ratio showing that one allele is completely dominant to the
other (crosses 1, 3, and 5); or a 1:1 ratio showing that a testcross was done for a
single gene (crosses 2, 7, and 9); or all progeny with the same phenotype as one or
both parents (crosses 4, 6, and 8); or a 1:2:1 phenotypic monohybrid ratio (cross
10). You can thus conclude that all the coat colors are controlled by the alleles of
one gene, with chinchilla (C) > himalaya (ch) > albino (ca).
b. 1. chca × chca
2. chca × caca
3. Cch × C(ch or ca)
4. CC × ch (ch or ca)
5. Cca × Cca
6. chch × caca
7. Cca × caca
8. caca × caca
9. Cch × ch(ch or ca) or Cca x chch
10. Cca × chca (Note that the 1:2:1 ratio among the progeny in this special case
does not reflect incomplete dominance or codominance, but instead results from
the fact that the cross involved three alleles with a particular dominance
relationship.)
c. Two answers are possible depending on the genotype of the chinchilla parents in
cross 9. Alternative 1: Cch (from cross 9) × Cca (from cross 10) → 1/4 CC
(chinchilla) : 1/4 Cca (chinchilla) : 1/4 Cch (chinchilla) : 1/4 chca (himalaya) = 3/4
chinchilla : 1/4 himalaya. Alternative 2: Cca (cross 9) × Cca (cross 10) →
3/4 C– chinchilla : 1/4 caca albino.
14. Designate the gene p (for pattern). Seven alleles exist, p1-p7, with p7 being the allele that
specifies absence of pattern and p1 > p2 > p3 > p4 > p5 > p6 > p7.
a. Seven different patterns are possible. These are associated with the following
genotypes: p1-, p2pa (where pa = p2, p3, p4… p7), p3pb (where pb = p3, p4, p5… p7),

chapter 3
3-
10
p4pc (where pc = p4, p5, p6, and p7), p5pd (where pd = p5, p6, and p7), p6pe (where pe
= p6 and p7), and p7p7.
b. The phenotype dictated by the allele p1 has the greatest number of genotypes
associated with it = 7 (p1p1 p1p2 p1p3, etc.). The absence of pattern is caused by
just one genotype, p7p7.
c. This finding suggests that the allele determining absence of pattern (p7) is very
common in these clover plants so that the p7p7 genotype is the most frequent in
the population. The other alleles are present, but are much less common in this
population.
15. a. This ratio is approximately 2/3 Curly : 1/3 normal.
b. The expected result for this cross is: Cy+Cy × Cy+Cy → 1/4 CyCy (?): 1/2 Cy+Cy
(Curly) : 1/4 Cy+Cy+ (normal). If the Cy Cy genotype is lethal, then the expected
ratio will match the observed data.
c. The cross is Cy+Cy × Cy+Cy+ → 1/2 Cy+Cy : 1/2 Cy+Cy+, so there would be
approximately 90 Curly-winged and 90 normal-winged flies. (Note that because
Cy Cy adults are not found, all curly-winged flies must be Cy+Cy heterozygotes.)
16. Two keys to this problem exist: (1) The sperm in pollen grains and ovules are gametes
that have only one copy of the S incompatibility gene, while the stigma (the part of the
female plant on which the pollen grains land has two copies of this gene. (2) Sperm with
a particular S gene allele cannot fertilize any ovules in a plant whose stigma has the
same S allele, because the pollen will not grow a tube allowing it to fertilize an ovule.
a. In the cross S1S2 × S1S2 all the pollen grains (whether they are S1 or S2) will land on
the stigmas of plants that have the same alleles, and therefore no progeny would
be produced at all.
b. The pollen grains would be S1 or S2. The S2 pollen could not fertilize the female
plant, but the S1 pollen could. The progeny would thus be S1S2 and S1S3 (in a 1:1
ratio).
c. All pollen grains would be able to fertilize all ovules, because the pollen grains do
not share any alleles with the female parent. As a result, four types of progeny
would be produced in equal numbers: S1S3, S1S4, S2S3, and S2S4.
d. This mechanism would prevent plant self-fertilization because any pollen
grain produced by any plant would land on a stigma sharing the same allele.
For example, if an S1 pollen grain produced by an S1S2 plant lands on a stigma from
the same plant, the stigma would have the same allele and no pollen tube would be
able to grow to allow fertilization. The same would be true for a S2 pollen grain
from the same plant. (Of interest, tomato plants in the wild cannot self-fertilize
because of this incompatibility mechanism; they proliferate only through cross-
fertilization. However, many domesticated cultivars of tomatoes can self-fertilize

chapter 3
3-
11
because they were selected for varieties that have mutations causing the failure of
the incompatibility mechanism.)
e. Plants with functioning incompatibility systems must be heterozygotes
because a pollen grain cannot fertilize a female plant sharing the same allele
of the S incompatibility gene. For example, an S1 pollen grain cannot fertilize
successfully any female plant that also has an S1 allele. No way thus exists to create
S1S1 homozygous progeny.
f. Peas cannot be governed by this mechanism because you already saw in
Chapter 2 that Gregor Mendel routinely self-fertilized his peas in the F1
generation to produce the F2 generation.
g. The larger the number of different alleles of the S gene that are present in the
population, the more likely it is that any given pollen grain of any genotype
would land on the stigma of a flower that did not share the same allele, and
the less likely that the pollen will interact unproductively with flowers that
share the same allele. Within the population, the proportion of matings that could
produce progeny would increase with a greater variety in S gene alleles; this would
clearly increase the fertility (and thus the average evolutionary fitness) of the
population.
17. a. The 2/3 montezuma : 1/3 wild type phenotypic ratio, and the statement that
montezumas are never true-breeding, together suggest that there is a recessive
lethal allele of this gene. When a recessive lethal exists, crossing two heterozygotes
results in a 1:2:1 genotypic ratio, but one of the 1/4 classes of homozygotes do not
survive. The result is the 2:1 phenotypic ratio as seen in this cross. Both the
montezuma parents were therefore heterozygous, Mm. The M allele must
confer the montezuma coloring in a dominant fashion, but homozygosity for M is
lethal.
b. Designate the alleles: M = montezuma, m = greenish; F = normal fin, f = ruffled.
Diagram the cross: Mm FF × mm ff → expected monohybrid ratio for the M
gene alone: 1/2 Mm (montezuma) : 1/2 mm (wild type); expected monohybrid ratio
for the F gene alone: all Ff. The expected dihybrid ratio = 1/2 Mm Ff
(montezuma, normal fin) : 1/2 mm Ff (greenish, normal fin).
c. Mm Ff × Mm Ff → expected monohybrid ratio for the M gene alone: 2/3
montezuma (Mm) : 1/3 greenish (mm); expected monohybrid ratio for the F gene
alone: 3/4 normal fin (F−) : 1/4 ruffled (ff). The expectations when considering
both genes together is: 6/12 montezuma, normal fin : 2/12 montezuma, ruffled
fin : 3/12 greenish, normal fin : 1/12 greenish, ruffled fin.
18. The answer for the phenotype of viability is straightforward. The mutant allele is
clearly recessive to the wild-type allele for the phenotype of viability:
Heterozygotes are viable, and thus have the same phenotype as homozygotes for the
wild-type allele (viability) and not the phenotype of homozygotes for the recessive allele
(lethality).

chapter 3
3-
12
For the phenotype of having fingerprints, the answer is more complicated. The
reason is that aside from the fact that they become inviable at some point during
development, we don’t know the fingerprint phenotype of the SMARCAD1 mutant
homozygotes. Remember that the definition of dominance is that the heterozygote has
the phenotype associated with the homozygote for the dominant allele, but this
definition is problematic if we do not know the homozygote’s phenotype.
This problem suggests two interesting possibilities for the function of the
SMARCAD1 gene, and each scenario suggests a different kind of dominance
relationship. One possibility is that the gene is pleiotropic – that is, SMARCAD1 has
distinct roles in early development and in fingerprint development later. Suppose that
some method exists to supply SMARCAD1 function early in development and then to
remove the function later. Homozygotes for the mutant allele could then be born, and
we could then see if they have fingerprints. If homozygotes for nonfunctional
SMARCAD1 alleles would lack fingerprints, then for the phenotype of having no
fingerprints, the nonfunctional SMARCAD allele would be dominant to the
normal allele. (This experiment of supplying gene function early in development and
then removing it later is not possible in humans, but you will learn in later chapters that
such genetic manipulations can be done with organisms like mice and fruit flies.)
A second possibility is that SMARCAD1 is required for skin development
generally, and not only the formation of fingerprints. In this case, homozygosity for
nonfunctional SMARCAD1 alleles is lethal because the skin cannot develop properly
without SMARCAD1 protein. When the level of the SMARCAD1 protein is half of
normal (in heterozygotes), the skin can develop more-or-less normally except that
fingerprints cannot form. If this is the case, then the SMARCAD1 nonfunctional
mutant alleles and normal SMARCAD1 alleles display incomplete dominance for
the phenotype of skin development: no fingerprints is a phenotype between normal
skin and skin formed so improperly that the person cannot be born.
19. a. The wild-type allele and the mutant allele display incomplete dominance because
the heterozygotes have a phenotype (blue lips and phenotypes) between that of the
two homozygotes (normal skin or blue skin).
b. Polly Ritchie is a heterozygote, but neither of her parents is recorded as a
heterozygote, although both parents have heterozygous ancestors. Thus, either
James Ritchie (and if so, his father Martin Ritchie also) or Hannah Fugate
must have been a heterozygote. Similarly, one of Manuel Fugate's parents
(Zachariah Fugate or Polly Campbell), one of Richard Smith's parents
(William Smith or Betty Ritchie), and one of Eleanor Fugate's parents
(William Fugate or Juda Campbell) must have been heterozygous.
c. Mary is likely a Ritchie or a Smith because she’s a carrier of a rare
methemoglobenia allele known to be present in those families.
d. Richard Smith and Martin Fugate's wife (Mary?) are the earliest people in the
pedigree recorded as having a blue phenotype (heterozygotes). The two of them
introduced the mutant allele(s) into the family. There is no indication in the pedigree
diagram that Richard Smith and Mary were related. If they are not related, then two

chapter 3
3-
13
different mutant NADH diaphorase alleles were introduced into this complex
pedigree.
Section 3.2
20. The cross is: walnut × single → F1 walnut × F1 walnut → 93 walnut : 29 rose : 32
pea : 11 single
a. How many genes are involved? The four F2 phenotypes means that 2 genes are
involved, A and B. Both genes affect the same structure, the comb. The F2
phenotypic dihybrid ratio among the progeny is close to 9:3:3:1, so there is no
epistasis. Because walnut is the most abundant F2 phenotype, it must be the
phenotype due to the A– B– genotype. Single combs are the least frequent class,
and are thus aa bb. Now assign genotypes to the cross. If the walnut F2 are A– B–,
then the original walnut parent must have been AA BB:
AA BB × aa bb → Aa Bb (walnut) → 9/16 A– B– (walnut) : 3/16 A– bb
(rose) : 3/16 aa B– (pea) : 1/6 aa bb (single).
b. Diagram the cross, recalling that the problem states the parents are homozygous:
AA bb (rose) × aa BB (pea) → Aa Bb (walnut) → 9/16 A– B– (walnut) :
3/16 A– bb (rose) : 3/16 aa B– (pea) : 1/16 aa bb (single). Notice that this F2 is
in identical proportions as the F2 generation in part (a).
c. Diagram the cross: A– B– (walnut) × aa B– (pea) → 12 A– B– (walnut) : 11 aa B–
(pea) : 3 A– bb (rose) : 4 aa bb (single). Because pea and single progeny exist, you
know that the walnut parent must be Aa. The 1 A– : 1 aa monohybrid ratio in the
progeny also tells you the walnut parent must have been Aa. Because some of the
progeny are single, you know that both parents must be Bb. In this case, the
monohybrid ratio for the B gene is 3 B– : 1 bb, so both parents were Bb. The original
cross must have been Aa Bb × aa Bb. You can verify that this cross would yield
the observed ratio of progeny by multiplying the probabilities expected for each
gene alone. For example, you anticipate that 1/2 the progeny would be Aa and 3/4
of the progeny would be Bb, so 1/2 × 3/4 = 3/8 of the progeny should be walnut;
this is close to the 12 walnut chickens seen among 30 total progeny.
d. Diagram the cross: A– B– (walnut) × A– bb (rose) → all A– B– (walnut). The
progeny are all walnut, so the walnut parent must be BB. No pea progeny are
seen, so both parents cannot be Aa, so one of the two parents must be AA.
This could be either the walnut or the rose parent or both.
21. black × chestnut → F1 bay → F2 black : bay : chestnut : liver
Four phenotypes in the F2 generation means two genes determine coat color. The
F1 bay animals produce four phenotypic classes, so they must be doubly
heterozygous, Aa Bb. Crossing a liver-colored horse to either of the original parents
resulted in the parent's phenotype. The liver horse's alleles do not affect the
phenotype, suggesting the recessive genotype aa bb. Though it is probable that the
original black mare was AA bb and the chestnut stallion was aa BB, each of these

chapter 3
3-
14
animals produced only 3 progeny, so it cannot be concluded definitively that these
animals were homozygous for the dominant allele they carry. Thus, the black mare
was A– bb, the chestnut stallion was aa B–, and the F1 bay animals are Aa
Bb. The F2 horses were: bay (A– B–), liver (aa bb), chestnut (aa B–), and
black (A– bb).
22. a. Because unaffected individuals had affected children, the trait is recessive. From
affected individual II-1, you know the mutant allele is present in this generation.
The trait was passed on through II-2 who was a carrier. All children of affected
individuals III-2 × III-3 are affected, as predicted for a recessive trait. However,
generation V seems inconsistent with recessive inheritance of a single gene. This
result is consistent with two different genes involved in hearing with a defect in
either gene leading to deafness: The trait is heterogeneous, meaning that two
family lines shown contain mutations in two separate genes. Furthermore,
the mutant alleles of both genes determining deafness are recessive.
b. Individuals in generation V are doubly heterozygous (Aa Bb), having inherited a
dominant and recessive allele of each gene from their parents (aa BB × AA bb). The
people in generation V are unaffected because the product of the dominant allele
of each gene is sufficient for normal function. This is an example of
complementation: The gamete from each parent provided the dominant allele that the
gamete from the other parent lacked.
23. green × yellow → F1 green → F2 9 green : 7 yellow
a. The 9:7 ratio is a variant of the 9:3:3:1 phenotypic dihybrid ratio, suggesting that
two genes are controlling color. The genotypes are:
AA BB (green) × aa bb (yellow) → F1 Aa Bb (green) → F2 9/16 A– B–
(green) : 3/16 A– bb (yellow) : 3/16 aa B– (yellow) : 1/16 aa bb (yellow).
b. Aa Bb × aa bb → 1/4 Aa Bb (green) : 1/4 aa Bb (yellow) : 1/4 Aa bb
(yellow) : 1/4 aa bb (yellow) = 1/4 green : 3/4 yellow.
c. This is an example of reciprocal recessive epistasis. That is, aa is epistatic to
B, while bb is epistatic to A.
d. One simple model is that the proteins made by the A and B genes work
together or in succession to generate a green pigment from a yellow
precursor in any of the following three ways:
Note that the genetic interactions do not distinguish between these three pathways.
Nor do the results guarantee that any one of these pathways is correct—many
more-complicated models are possible.

chapter 3
3-
15
e. Zucchini that are AA bb or aa BB are both pure-breeding yellow, and
crossing them results in Aa Bb progeny that are green.
f. Complementation occurred in part (e). Note that this interaction can be described
as complementation only if the recessive alleles are nonfunctional (or have lost
some function) and the dominant alleles are functional. In this case, the green
phenotype is the wild type.
24. a. white × white → F1 white → F2 126 white : 33 purple
At first glance this cross seems to involve only one gene, as true-breeding white
parents give white F1s. However, if this were true, then the F2 MUST be totally
white as well. The purple F2 plants show that this cross is NOT controlled by 1
gene.
These results may instead be due to 2 genes. To determine if this is the case, it
makes sense to ask: Does a ratio of 126 : 33 represent a variant of the 9:3:3:1
dihybrid ratio? Usually when you are given raw numbers of individuals for the
classes, you divide through by the smallest number, yielding in this case 3.8 white : 1
purple. This is neither a recognizable monohybrid nor dihybrid ratio. Dividing
through by the smallest class is NOT the correct way to convert raw numbers to a
ratio, if it is possible that the smallest class in the ratio is not 1.
The correct method for this problem is as follows. Assuming that the F1 in this
case are dihybrids, 16 different equally likely fertilization events must have produced
the F2 progeny (16 boxes in the 4 × 4 Punnett square), even though the phenotypes
may not be distributed in the usual 9/16 : 3/16 : 3/16 : 1/16 ratio. If the 159 F2
progeny are divided equally into 16 fertilization types, then 159/16 = ~10 F2 plants
exist for each fertilization type. The 126 white F2s therefore represent 126/10 =
~13 of these fertilizations. Likewise, the 33 purple plants represent 33/10 = ~3
fertilization types. The F2 phenotypic ratio is thus approximately 13 white : 3
purple. The data fit the hypothesis that two genes control color, and that the
F1 are dihybrids.
You can now assign genotypes to the parents in the cross. Because the parents
are homozygous (true-breeding) and 2 genes control the phenotypes, you can set up
the genotypes of the parents in two different ways so that the F1 dihybrids are
heterozygous for dominant and recessive alleles of each gene. One option is: AA
BB (white) × aa bb (white) → Aa Bb (white, same as AA BB parent) → 9
A– B– (white) : 3A– bb (unknown phenotype) : 3aa B– (unknown phenotype)
: 1 aa bb (white, same as aa bb parent). If you assume that A– bb is white and aa
B– is purple (or vice versa), then this is a match for the observed data presented in the
cross above [(9 + 3 + 1) = 13 white : 3 purple].
Alternatively, you could try to diagram the cross as AA bb (white) × aa BB
(white) → Aa Bb (whose phenotype is unknown as this is NOT a genotype seen in
the parents) → 9 A– B– (same unknown phenotype as in the F1) : 3 A– bb (white
like the AA bb parent) : 3aa B– (white like the aa BB parent) : 1 aa bb (unknown
phenotype). Such a cross cannot give an F2 phenotypic ratio of 13 white : 3 purple.
The only F2 classes that could be purple are A– B–, but this is impossible because
(i) this class (9/16) is much larger than the number of purple plants observed

chapter 3
3-
16
(~3/16); and (ii) the F1 plants must then have been purple (which was not the case).
Therefore, the first set of possible genotypes (written in bold above) is the best fit
for the observed data.
Assume that A– bb plants are white, and aa B– plants are purple. Our
model above states that to be purple, a plant must have a B allele and no A
allele. Thus, we can say that A is epistatic to B. This phenomenon is a form of
dominant epistasis. [Table 3-2 (reproduced on p. 3-3 of the Solutions Manual) calls this
dominant epistasis II, although the Roman numeral is arbitrary and only included to
facilitate discussion.]
b. white F2 × white F2 (self-fertilization) → 3/4 white : 1/4 purple. Assume again that
the aa B– class is purple in part (a) above. A 3:1 monohybrid ratio means the
parents are both heterozygous for one gene with purple due to the recessive allele.
The second gene is not affecting the ratio, so both parents must be homozygous for
the same allele of that gene. Thus the self-fertilization must be: Aa BB (white) ×
Aa BB (white) → 3/4 A– BB (white) : 1/4 aa BB (purple).
c. purple F2 × purple F2 (self-fertilization) → 3 purple : 1 white. Again, the selfed
parent must be heterozygous for one gene and homozygous for the other gene.
Because purple is aa B–, the genotypes of the purple F2 plants must be aa Bb.
d. white F2 × white F2 (a cross, not a self-fertilization) → 1/2 purple : 1/2 white.
The 1:1 monohybrid ratio means a testcross was done for one of the genes. The
second gene is not altering the ratio in the progeny, so the parents must be
homozygous for that gene. If purple is aa B–, then the genotypes of the parents
must be aa bb (white) × Aa BB (white) → 1/2 Aa Bb (white) : 1/2 aa Bb
(purple).
25. a. The F2 would be 9 A− B− (purple) : 3 A− bb (blue) : 3 aa B− (white) : 1 aa bb
(white). The phenotypic ratio would therefore be 9 purple : 4 white : 3 blue.
b. From Table 3.2 (reproduced on p. 3-3 of this Answer Book), the 9:4:3 ratio
indicates recessive epistasis. In this case, aa is epistatic to B and bb. The reason is
that aa flowers are white regardless of the gene B genotype, even though gene B
contributes otherwise to the same phenotype.
26. Dominance relationships are between alleles of the same gene. Only one gene is
involved when considering dominance relationships. Epistasis involves two
genes. The alleles of one gene affect the phenotypic expression of the second gene.
27. a. The cross is between two normal flies that carry H and S. These individuals cannot
be homozygous for H or for S, because we are told that both are lethal in
homozygotes. Thus, the mating described is a dihybrid cross: Hh Ss × Hh Ss. The
genotypic classes among the progeny zygotes should be 9 H– S–, 3 H– ss, 3 hh S–,
and 1 hh ss. However, the results are complicated by the fact that all zygotes that are
HH or SS or both will die before they hatch into adult flies.
One approach is to do this problem as the branched-line diagram shown in the
following figure, in which the progeny should be 2/3 Hh and 1/3 hh (considering
the H gene alone) and 2/3 Ss and 1/3 ss (considering the S gene alone). As can be

chapter 3
3-
17
seen from the diagram, 7/9 of the adult progeny will be normal, and 2/9 will be
hairless.
b. As just seen in the diagram, the hairless progeny of the cross in part (a) are Hh ss,
and these are mated with parental flies that are Hh Ss. You could again portray the
results of this cross as a branched-line diagram. For the H gene, again 2/3 of the
viable adult progeny will be Hh and 1/3 will be hh. The cross involving the S gene is
a testcross, and all the progeny will be viable, so 1/2 the progeny will be Ss and 1/2
will be ss. As seen in the diagram that follows, 2/6 = 1/3 of the progeny will be
hairless and the remaining 2/3 will be normal.
28. IAIB Ss × IAIA Ss → expected ratio for the I gene of 1/2 IAIA : 1/2 IAIB; expected
ratio for the S gene considered alone of 3/4 S– : 1/4 ss. Use the product rule to
generate the phenotypic ratio for both genes considered together and then assign
phenotypes, remembering that all individuals with the ss genotype look like type O. The
phenotypic ratio for both genes is: 3/8 IAIA S– : 3/8 IAIB S– : 1/8 IAIA ss : 1/8 IAIB
ss = 3/8 A : 3/8 AB : 1/8 O : 1/8 O = 3/8 Type A : 3/8 Type AB : 2/8 Type O.
29. You would first self the mutant plant. If the mutant traits are dominant and the
plant is heterozygous for the genes involved, it is possible that you might see
some progeny displaying different combinations of the recessive wild-type traits.
Such a result would suggest that different genes are responsible for the different
traits.
If the mutant plant is pure-breeding, you should cross it (or its self-fertilized
descendants) with a pure-breeding wild-type strain, and then self-fertilize the F1
progeny. If several genes were involved, the F2 would have several different
combinations of the petal color, markings, and stem position traits. If all 3 traits
were determined by an allele of one gene, the three non-wild-type or three wild-
type traits would always be inherited together.

chapter 3
3-
18
30. If ABO blood type were controlled only by the I gene, then her husband would have a
reason to be concerned. In that case, he is ii, and she is either IB
i or IB
IB
; their child
could not have blood type A because neither of them has an IA
allele. However, we
know that the H gene is also involved in ABO blood type, and that hh is epistatic to I
such that all hh genotypes are blood type O. This means that the husband’s O blood
type could be due to an IA
− hh genotype, and his wife’s genotype could be IB
i
H−; they could easily have had an IA
i Hh (type A) child.
31. a. blood types: I-1 AB; I-2 A; I-3 B; I-4 AB; II-1 O; II-2 O; II-3 AB; III-1 A; III-2
O.
b. genotypes: I-1 Hh IAIB; I-2 Hh IAi (or IAIA); I-3 H– IBIB (or IBi); I-4 H–
IAIB; II-1 H– ii; II-2 hh IAIA (or IAi or IAIB); II-3 Hh IAIB; III-1 Hh IAi;
III-2 hh IAIA (or IAIB or IAi or IBi or IBIB)
At first glance, you find inconsistencies between expectations and what could
be inherited from a parent. For example, I-1 (AB)  I-2 (A) could not have an O
child (II-2). The epistatic h allele (which causes the Bombay phenotype) could
explain these inconsistencies. If II-2 has an O phenotype because she is hh, her
parents must both have been Hh. The Bombay phenotype would also explain the
second seeming inconsistency of two O individuals (II-1 and II-2) having an A
child. II-2 could have received an IA allele from one of her parents and passed this
on to III-1 together with one h allele. Parent II-1 would have to contribute the H
allele so that the IA allele would be expressed; the presence of H means that II-1
must also be ii to be type O. A third inconsistency is that individuals II-2 and II-3
could not have an ii child since II-3 has the IAIB genotype, but III-2 has the O
phenotype. This could also be explained if II-3 is Hh and III-2 is hh.
32. a. Diagram one of the crosses:
white-1 × white-2 → red F1 → 9 red : 7 white
Even though only 2 phenotypes are present in the F2, color is not controlled by one
gene. Instead, the 9:7 ratio is a variation of 9:3:3:1, so 2 genes control the colors in
this cross. Individuals must have at least one dominant allele of each gene to get the
red color; this is an example of reciprocal recessive epistasis (refer to Table 3.2
reproduced on p. 3-3 of this Answer Book). Thus, the genotypes of the two pure-
breeding white parents in this cross are aa BB × AA bb. The same conclusions hold
for the other 2 crosses.
If white-1 is aa BB and white-2 is AA bb , then white-3 must be AA BB cc. The
reason is that if white-3 had the same genotype as white-1 or white-2, then one of
the three crosses would have produced an all-white F1. Because none of the crosses
had an all-white F1, we can conclude that three genes are involved.
b. White-1 is aa BB CC; white-2 is AA bb CC and white-3 is AA BB cc.
c. aa BB CC (white-1) × AA bb CC (white-2) → Aa Bb CC (red) → 9/16 A–
B– CC (red) : 3/16 A– bb CC (white) : 3/16 aa B– CC (white) : 1/6 aa bb CC

chapter 3
3-
19
(white). Red color requires a dominant, functional allele of each of the three
genes (A– B– C–).
33. Diagram the cross. Figure out an expected monohybrid ratio for each gene separately,
then apply the product rule to generate the expected dihybrid ratio.
AyA Cc × AyA cc → monohybrid ratio for the A gene alone: 1/4 AyAy (dead) :
1/2 AyA (yellow) : 1/4 AA (agouti) = 2/3 AyA (yellow) : 1/3 AA (agouti);
monohybrid ratio for the C gene: 1/2 Cc (non-albino) : 1/2 cc (albino).
Overall there will be 2/6 AyA Cc (yellow) : 2/6 AyA cc (albino) : 1/6 AA Cc (agouti) :
1/6 AA cc (albino) = 2/6 AyA Cc (yellow) : 3/6 – – cc (albino) : 1/6 AA Cc
(agouti). Note that the AyA cc animals must be albino because the albino parent had
exactly the same genotype; this indicates that cc is epistatic to all alleles of gene A.
Although you were not explicitly told that the AA cc animals are also albino, this makes
sense because cc albino color must be epistatic to alleles of all genes that confer color
given that no pigments are produced.
34. a. No, a single gene cannot account for this result. While the 1:1 ratio seems like a
testcross, the fact that the phenotype of one class of offspring (linear) is not
the same as either of the parents argues against this being a testcross.
b. The appearance of four phenotypes suggests that two genes control the
phenotypes.
c. The 3:1 ratio suggests that two alleles of one gene determine the difference
between the wild-type and scattered patterns.
d. The true-breeding wild-type fish are homozygous by definition, and the scattered
fish have to be homozygous recessive according to the ratio seen in part (c), so the
cross is: bb (scattered) × BB (wild type) → F1 Bb (wild type) → F2 3/4 B–
(wild type) : 1/4 bb (scattered).
e. The inability to obtain a true-breeding nude stock suggests that the nude fish are
heterozygous (Aa) and that the AA genotype dies. Thus Aa (nude) × Aa (nude)
→ 2/3 Aa (nude) : 1/3 aa (scattered).
f. Going back to the linear cross from part (b), the fact that four phenotypes appeared
led us to propose two genes were involved. The 6:3:2:1 ratio looks like an altered
9:3:3:1 ratio in which some genotypes may be missing, as predicted from the result
in part (e) that AA animals do not survive. The 9:3:3:1 ratio results from crossing
double heterozygotes, so the linear parents are doubly heterozygous Aa Bb.
The lethal phenotype associated with the AA genotype produces the 6:3:2:1
ratio. The phenotypes and corresponding genotypes of the progeny of the
linear × linear cross are: 6 linear, Aa B– : 3 wild type, aa B– : 2 nude, Aa bb : 1
scattered, aa bb. Note that the AA BB, AA Bb, AA Bb, and AA bb genotypes are
missing due to lethality.
35. This problem shows that gene interactions producing variations of the 9:3:3:1 ratio in
addition to those shown in Table 3.2 (reproduced on p. 3-3 of the Solutions Manual)
are possible.

chapter 3
3-
20
a. Using the information provided, one of the pure-breeding white strains must be
homozygous for recessive alleles of gene A and the other pure-breeding white strain
must be homozygous for recessive alleles of gene B. That is, the cross was AA bb
(white) × aa BB (white) → F1 Aa Bb (all blue).
b. In the F2 generation produced by selfing of the F1 plants, you would find a
genotypic ratio of 9 A– B– : 3 A– bb : 3 aa B– : 1 aa bb. The A– B– plants would
have blue flowers because colorless precursor 1 would be converted into blue
pigment. (Colorless precursor 2 would not produce blue pigment in these flowers
because the second pathway is suppressed by the proteins specified by the dominant
alleles of the two genes. However, the color would still be blue because the pigment
produced by the first pathway is sufficient for the blue phenotype.) The A– bb
plants would be white because the first pathway could not produce blue pigment in
the absence of the protein specified by B, while the second pathway would be shut
off by the protein specified by A. The aa B– plants would be white because the first
pathway could not produce blue pigment in the absence of the protein specified by
A, while the second pathway would be shut off by the protein specified by B.
Interestingly, the aa bb plants would be blue because even though the first pathway
would not function, the second would as it is not suppressed. You would thus
expect in the F2 generation a ratio of 10 blue (9 A– B– + 1 aa bb) : 6 white (3
A– bb + 3 aa B– ).
36. The answers are presented in the table below. Different colors in the table represent
different phenotypes; these colors are chosen arbitrarily and do not signify anything.
The numbers in parentheses indicate the compounds that are present to produce the
colors.
Part 9A– B– 3 A– bb 3 aa B– 1 aa bb Ratio
a (2 + 4) (2 + 3) (1 + 4) (1 + 3) 9:3:3:1
b (2) (2) (2) (1) 15:1
c (3) (2) (1) (1) 9:3:4
d (2) (1) (1) (1) 9:7
e (2 + 3) (2) (3) (1) 9:3:3:1
f (2 + 4) = (2) (2 + 3) = (2) (1 + 4) (1 + 3) 12:3:1
g (3) (2) = (1) (1) = (2) (1) = (2) 9:7
h (2) (1) (2) (2) 13:3
37. A particular phenotypic ratio does not allow you to infer the operation of a
specific biochemical mechanism because as can be seen from the answers to
Problem 36, different biochemical mechanisms can produce the same ratio of
phenotypes [for example, the pathways in parts (d) and (g) are different yet both yield
9:7 ratios]. The ratio seen in a cross may nonetheless provide information about types
of biochemical pathways you could exclude from consideration because those pathways
could not produce the observed ratio.
In contrast, if you know the biochemical mechanism behind a gene
interaction and you also know the dominance relationships of the alleles, you can then

chapter 3
3-
21
trace out the consequences of each genotypic class and thus you can predict the ratios
of phenotypes you would see among the F2 progeny.
Section 3.3
38. a. The yellow parent must have an Ay allele, but we don't know the second allele of
the A gene (Ay–). We don't know at the outset what alleles this yellow mouse has at
the B gene, so we'll leave these alleles for the time being as ??. Because this mouse
does show color we know it is not cc (albino), so it must have at least one C allele
(C–). The brown agouti parent has at least one A allele (A -); it must be bb at the B
gene; and as there is color it must also be C–. The mating between these two can
thus be represented as Ay– ?? C– × A– bb C–.
Now consider the progeny. Because one pup was albino (cc), the parents must
both be Cc. A brown pup (bb) indicates that both parents had to be able to
contribute a b allele, so we now know the first mouse (the yellow parent) must have
had at least one b allele. The fact that this brown pup was non-agouti means both
parents carried an a allele. The black agouti progeny tells us that the first mouse
must have also had a B allele. This latter fact also clarifies that Ay is epistatic to B
because this parent was yellow rather than black. The complete genotypes of the
mice are therefore: Aya Bb Cc × Aa bb Cc.
b. Think about each gene individually, then consider the effect of the other genes in
combination with that phenotype. C– leads to a phenotype with color; cc gives albino
(which is epistatic to all colors determined by the other genes because no pigments
are produced). The possible genotypes of the progeny of this cross for the A gene
are AyA, Aya, Aa and aa, giving yellow, yellow, agouti and non-agouti phenotypes,
respectively. Since yellow (Ay) is epistatic to B, non-albino mice with Ay will be
yellow regardless of the genotype of the B gene. Aa is agouti; with the aa genotype
there is no yellow on the hair (non-agouti). The type of coloration depends on the B
gene. For B the offspring could be Bb (black) or bb (brown). In total, six different
coat color phenotypes are possible: albino (–– –– cc), yellow (Ay(A or a) ––
C–), brown agouti (A– bb C–), black agouti (A– B– C–), brown (aa bb C–),
and black (aa B– C–). [Note: Although Ay (yellow color) is in fact epistatic to B
(black) or bb (brown) colors governed by the B gene, you were not explicitly told this.
Thus, based on the information provided, you might have included an additional
color phenotype if you assumed that Ay(A or a) bb C– confers a lighter color than
the yellow of Ay(A or a) Bb C– animals.]
39. In Fig. 3.28b, the A1 and B1 alleles each have the same effect on the phenotype
(plant height in this example), while the A0 and B0 alleles are non-functional. The
shortest plants are A0A0B0B0, and the tallest plants are A1A1B1B1. The phenotypes
are determined by the total number of A1 and B1 alleles in the genotype. Thus,
A0A1B0B0 plants are the same phenotype as A0A0B0B1. In total, there will be five
different phenotypes: four '0' alleles (total A1+ B1 alleles = 0); one 1 allele + three 0

chapter 3
3-
22
alleles (total = 1); two 1 alleles + two 0 alleles (total = 2); three 1 alleles + one 0 allele
(total = 3); and four 1 alleles (total = 4).
In Fig. 3.21, the a allele = b allele = no function (in this case no color = white). If
the A allele has the same level of function as a B allele then you would see 5 phenotypes
as was the case for Fig. 3.28b. But as a total of 9 phenotypes exist, this cannot be true
so A≠B. Notice that aa Bb is lighter than Aa bb even though both genotypes have the
same number of dominant alleles. Thus, in Fig. 3.21 an A allele has more effect on
coloration than a B allele, so 16 genotypes lead to 9 phenotypes.
40. a. Aa Bb Cc × Aa Bb Cc → 9/16 A– B– × 3/4 C– : 9/16 A– B– × 1/4 cc : 3/16 A–
bb × 3/4 C– : 3/16 A– bb × 1/4 cc : 3/16 aa B– × 3/4 C– : 3/16 aa B– × 1/4 cc :
1/16 aa bb × 3/4 C– : 1/16 aa bb × 1/4 cc = 27/64 A– B– C– (wild type) : 9/64
A– B– cc : 9/64 A– bb C– : 3/64 A– bb cc : 9/64 aa B– C– : 3/64 aa B– cc : 3/64 aa
bb C– : 1/64 aa bb cc = 27/64 wild type : 37/64 mutant.
b. Diagram the crosses:
1. unknown male × AA bb cc → 1/4 wild type (A– B– C–) : 3/4 mutant
2. unknown male × aa BB cc → 1/2 wild type (A– B– C–) : 1/2 mutant
3. unknown male × aa bb CC → 1/2 wild type (A– B– C–) : 1/2 mutant
The 1:1 ratio in test crosses 2 and 3 is expected if the unknown male is
heterozygous for one of the genes that are recessive in the testcross parent. The 1
wild type : 3 mutant ratio arises when the male is heterozygous for two of the genes
that are homozygous recessive in the testcross parent. (If you apply the product rule
to 1/2 B– : 1/2 bb and 1/2 C– : 1/2 cc in the first cross, then you find 1/4 B– C–,
1/4 B– cc, 1/4 bb C–, and 1/4 bb cc. Only B– C– will be wild type, the other 3
classes will be mutant). Thus, the unknown male must be Bb Cc. In testcross 1 the
male could be either AA or aa. Crosses 2 and 3 show that the male is only
heterozygous for one of the recessive genes in each case: gene C in testcross 2 and
gene B in testcross 3. To get wild-type progeny in both crosses, the male must be
AA. Therefore, the genotype of the unknown male is AA Bb Cc.
41. a. For all five crosses, determine the number of genes involved in the trait and the
dominance relationships between the alleles. Cross 1: One gene, red>blue. Cross 2:
One gene, lavender>blue. Cross 3: One gene, codominance/incomplete dominance
(1:2:1), bronze is the phenotype of the heterozygote. Cross 4: Two genes with
recessive epistasis (9 red : 4 yellow : 3 blue). Cross 5: Two genes with recessive
epistasis (9 lavender : 4 yellow : 3 blue). In total there are two genes. One gene
controls blue (cb), red (Cr) and lavender (Cl) where Cr = Cl > cb. A second
gene controls the yellow phenotype: Y seems to have no effect on color, so in
the presence of Y the phenotype is determined by the alleles of the C gene.
The y allele makes the flower yellow, and yy is epistatic to all alleles of the C
gene.
b. cross 1: CrCr YY (red) × cbcb YY (blue) → Crcb YY (red) → 3/4 Cr– YY
(red) : 1/4 cbcb YY (blue)
cross 2: ClCl YY (lavender) × cbcb YY (blue) → Clcb YY (lavender) → 3/4
Cl– YY (lavender) : 1/4 cbcb YY (blue)

chapter 3
3-
23
cross 3: ClCl YY (lavender) × CrCr YY (red) → ClCr YY (bronze) → 1/4
ClCl YY (lavender) : 1/2 ClCr YY (bronze) : 1/4 CrCr YY (red)
cross 4: CrCr YY × cbcb yy (yellow) → Crcb Yy (red) → 9/16 Cr– Y– (red)
: 3/16 Cr– yy (yellow) : 3/16 cbcb Y– (blue ): 1/16 cbcb yy (yellow)
cross 5: ClCl yy (yellow) × cbcb YY (blue) → Clcb Yy (lavender) → 9/16
Cl– Y– (lavender) : 3/16 Cl– yy (yellow) : 3/16 cbcb Y– (blue) : 1/16 cbcb
yy (yellow)
c. CrCr yy (yellow) × ClCl YY (lavender) → CrCl Yy (bronze) → monohybrid ratio
for the C gene is 1/4 CrCr : 1/2 CrCl : 1/4 ClCl and monohybrid ratio for the Y
gene is 3/4 Y– : 1/4yy. Using the product rule, these generate a dihybrid ratio of
3/16 CrCr Y– (red) : 3/8 CrCl Y– (bronze) : 3/16 ClCl Y– (lavender) : 1/16
CrCr yy (yellow) : 1/8 CrCl yy (novel genotype) : 1/16 ClCl yy (yellow). (Note:
You expect the CrCl yy genotype to be yellow as yy is normally epistatic to the C
gene. However, you have no direct evidence from the data in any of these crosses
that this assumption is true, so it is possible that this genotype could cause a
different and perhaps completely new phenotype.)
42. a. Analyze each cross by determining how many genes are involved in the coloration
phenotypes as well as the relationships between the alleles of these genes. In cross
1, there are 2 genes because 3 classes in the F2 show a modified 9:3:3:1 ratio
(12:1:3), and LR is the doubly homozygous recessive class. In cross 2, only 1 gene is
involved because 2 phenotypes occur in a 3:1 ratio; WR>DR. In cross 3, again only
1 gene is involved (2 phenotypes in a 1:3 ratio); DR>LR. In cross 4, 1 gene is
involved (2 phenotypes, with a 3:1 ratio); WR>LR. In cross 5, there are again 2
genes (and as in cross 1, there is a 12:1:3 ratio of three classes); LR is the double
homozygous recessive. In total, 2 genes control these phenotypes in foxgloves.
b. Remember that all four starting strains are true-breeding. In cross 1 the parents can
be assigned the following genotypes: AA BB (WR-1) × aa bb (LR) → Aa Bb (WR)
→ 9 A– B– (WR) : 3 A– bb (WR; this class displays the epistatic interaction) : 3 aa
B– (DR) :1 aa bb (LR). The results of cross 2 suggested that DR differs from WR-1
by one gene, so DR is aa BB; cross 3 confirms these genotypes for DR and LR.
Cross 4 introduces WR-2, which differs from LR by one gene and differs from DR
by 2 genes, so WR-2 is AA bb. Cross 5 would then be AA bb (WR-2) × aa BB
(DR) → Aa Bb (WR) → 9 A– B– (WR) : 3 A– bb (WR) : 3 aa B– (DR) : 1 aa bb
(LR) = 12 WR : 3 DR : 1 LR.
c. WR from the F2 of cross 1 LR → 253 WR : 124 DR : 123 LR. Remember from
part (b) that LR is aa bb and DR is aa B– while WR can be either A– B– or A– bb =
A- ??. The experiment is essentially a testcross for the WR parent. The observed
monohybrid ratio for the A gene is 1/2 Aa : 1/2 aa (253 Aa : 124 + 123 aa), so the
WR parent must be Aa. The DR and LR classes of progeny show that the WR
parent is also heterozygous for the B gene (DR is Bb and LR is bb in these progeny).
Thus, the cross is Aa Bb (WR) × aa bb (LR).

chapter 3
3-
24
43. The hairy × hairy → 2/3 hairy : 1/3 normal cross described in the first paragraph of the
problem tells us that the hairy flies are heterozygous, that the hairy phenotype is
dominant to normal, and that the homozygous hairy progeny are lethal (that is, hairy is
a recessive lethal). Thus, hairy is Hh, normal is hh, and the lethal genotype is HH.
Normal flies therefore should be hh (normal-1) and a cross with hairy (Hh) would be
expected to always give 1/2 Hh (hairy) : 1/2 hh (normal) as seen in cross 1.
In cross 2, the progeny MUST for the same reasons be 1/2 Hh : 1/2 hh, yet they
ALL appear normal. This suggests the normal-2 stock has another mutation that
suppresses the hairy wing phenotype in the Hh progeny. The hairy parent must have the
recessive alleles of this suppressor gene (ss), while the normal-2 stock must be
homozygous for the dominant allele (SS) that suppresses the hairy phenotype. Thus
cross 2 is hh SS (normal-2) × Hh ss (hairy) → 1/2 Hh Ss (normal because hairy is
suppressed) : 1/2 hh Ss (normal).
In cross 3, the normal-3 parent is heterozygous for the suppressor gene: hh Ss
(normal-3) × Hh ss (hairy) → the expected ratios for each gene alone are 1/2 Hh : 1/2
hh and 1/2 Ss : 1/2 ss, so the expected ratio for the two genes together is 1/4 Hh Ss
(normal) : 1/4 Hh ss (hairy) : 1/4 hh Ss (normal) : 1/4 hh ss (normal) = 3/4 normal : 1/4
hairy.
In cross 4 you see a 2/3 : 1/3 ratio again, as if you were crossing hairy x hairy. After
a bit of trial-and-error examining the remaining possibilities for these two genes, you
will be able to demonstrate that this cross was Hh Ss (normal-4) × Hh ss (hairy) →
expected ratio for the individual genes are 2/3 Hh : 1/3 hh and 1/2 Ss : 1/2 ss, so the
expected ratio for the two genes together from the product rule is 2/6 Hh Ss (normal) :
2/6 Hh ss (hairy) : 1/6 hh Ss (normal) : 1/6 hh ss (normal) = 2/3 normal : 1/3 hairy.
44. a. The mutant plant lacks the function of all three genes, so its genotype must be aa
bb cc.
b. Considering each gene separately, 3/4 of the F2 progeny will have at least one
dominant allele, whereas 1/4 will be homozygous for the recessive allele. As just
seen in part (a), mutant plants must be triply homozygous recessive. The chance
that a plant will have the aa bb cc genotype is 1/4 × 1/4 × 1/4 = 1/64. All other F2
plants will be normal for this phenotype, so the fraction of normal plants = 1 –
1/64 = 63/64.
c. The most likely explanation for redundant gene function is that in the relatively
recent past, a single gene became duplicated (or in this case, triplicated). The
three copies of the SEP gene are nearly identical to each other and thus fulfill the
same function. Only if the functions of all three genes are lost does a mutant
phenotype result. In fact, these kinds of gene duplication events occur often enough
in nature that redundant gene function is a common phenomenon.
45. a. The split-hand deformity shows a dominant inheritance pattern; affected people
occur in every generation.
b. The penetrance is at most 5/6 ≈ 83%. The father of the proband must have the
allele for the deformity although he does not display it. Because the pedigree does
not contain enough information to know if several other unaffected people in the
family have the allele, the penetrance could be lower than 83%.

chapter 3
3-
25
c. As the proband is heterozygous for the deformity allele, the chance that the child
inherited it is 1/2. If the child is also a heterozygote, the likelihood that he or she
would express the defect is ~83%. Thus, the chance that the child would be
affected by the deformity is 1/2 × 83% ≈ 42%.
d. Four people in the pedigree diagram (III-1, III-2, III-4, and III-7) might
have the mutant allele (because their parents had the mutant allele), but no
information in the pedigree allows us to know one way or the other. If any of
them do have the mutant allele, then the penetrance is lower than 83%. For
example, if we somehow determined that all of those four people had the mutant
allele, then the penetrance would be 5/10 = 50%, and the answer to part (c) would
be 1/2 × 50% = 25%. This would be the lowest possible likelihood consistent with
the data given.
46. a. The genotypic ratio would be 9 purple (A− B−) : 7 white (A− bb, aa B−, aa bb).
b. If the penetrance of the purple phenotype in A− B− plants is 75%, then 25% of the
(A− B−) progeny would be white, and only 75% of them would be purple. This
means that the purple plants in the 9/16 class would be 9/16 × 3/4 = 27/64 of the
total progeny. All the remaining F2 progeny [(64/64) – (27/64) = 37/64] will be
white. Therefore, the genotypic ratio would be 27 purple : 37 white.
c. If you crossed two different pure-breeding white strains, and some but not all
the F1 were purple, one possible explanation is incomplete penetrance of the
purple phenotype. In addition, you would never be able to make a pure-
breeding purple strain, because even in an AA BB strain, in every generation, not
all the plants will be purple.
47. a. Two different phenotypes are mentioned in this problem. One phenotype is the
shape of the erythrocytes. All people with the genotype SPH+
SPH–
have
spherical erythrocytes. Therefore, this phenotype is fully penetrant and
shows no variation in expression. The second phenotype is anemia. The
expressivity among anemic patients varies from severe to mild. In fact, some
people with the SPH+
SPH–
genotype (150/2400) have no symptoms of
anemia at all. Thus, the penetrance of the anemic phenotype is 2250/2400 or
0.94.
b. The severity of the anemia is greatly reduced when the spleen functions poorly and
does not recognize the spherical erythrocytes as defective cells that must be
eliminated from the bloodstream. Therefore, treatment might involve removing
the spleen (an organ which is not essential to survival). The more efficiently
the spleen functions the earlier in a patient's life it should be removed. Note
that SPH+
SPH–
with no symptoms of anemia should not be subjected to this
drastic treatment
48. a. The most likely mode of inheritance is a single gene with incomplete dominance
such that FnFn = normal (<250 mg/dl), FnFa = intermediate levels of serum
cholesterol (250-500 mg/dl) and FaFa homozygotes = elevated levels (>500

chapter 3
3-
26
mg/dl). Some of the individuals in the pedigrees do not fit this hypothesis. In two
of the families (Families 2 and 4), two normal parents have a child with intermediate
levels of serum cholesterol. One possibility is that in each family, at least one of
these normal parents (I-3 and/or I-4 in Family 2; I-1 and/or I-2 in Family 4)
was actually a FnFa heterozygote who did not have elevated cholesterol in
excess of 250 mg/dl. In this scenario, familial hypercholesterolemia is a trait
with incomplete penetrance, so that some unaffected people have a genotype that
causes the disease in other people. It is also possible that the affected children of
these parents do not have an Fa allele associated with elevated serum cholesterol,
but they show the trait for other reasons such as diet, level of exercise, or other
genes. This explanation is reasonable, but perhaps less likely because multiple
children would have to have the trait but not the Fa allele.
b. Familial hypercholesterolemia also shows variable expressivity, meaning that
people with the same genotype have the condition, but to different extents. This
suggests that factors other than just the genotype are involved in the expression of
the phenotype. Such factors could again include diet, level of exercise, and other
genes.
49. a. The pattern in both families is similar since unaffected individuals have affected
progeny and the trait skips generations. It is highly unlikely that this trait is
recessive. If that were the case, in the Smiths the unrelated people I-2, II-4, and II-7
must be must be carriers. Given that the trait is rare, a much more likely hypothesis
is that the trait is dominant but not 100% penetrant.
b. Assuming this is a dominant but not completely penetrant trait, individuals II-3
and III-6 in the Smiths’ pedigree individual and II-6 in the Jeffersons’
pedigree must carry the dominant allele but not express it in their phenotypes.
c. If the trait were common, recessive inheritance must also be considered a
possible, or even likely, mode of inheritance.
d. None; in cases where two unaffected parents have an affected child, both parents
would be carriers of the recessive trait.
50. Several scenarios are possible. (i) Perhaps the trait is incompletely penetrant. That
is, one parent could be Pp but not show the disease phenotype, and then the child could
inherit the P disease allele. (ii) Both parents could be pp yet the P allele inherited by
the child was due to a spontaneous mutation during the formation of the gamete
in one of the parents; we will discuss this topic in Chapter 7. (iii) It is also possible
that the father of the child is not the male parent of the couple. In this case, the
biological father must have the disease.
51. While the general pattern of fingerprints is determined by genes, every detail of
the pattern is not. Chance events that occur during skin development affect this
trait.
52. The Black Lab: A solid black dog must: make eumelanin (E–); not be brown (B–);
have no pheomelanin striping in the hairs [(Kb– and any A gene alleles) or (aa and any K

chapter 3
3-
27
gene alleles)]; must not be diluted to gray (D–); no spotting (S–); and no merle (M2M2).
Because Labs always breed true for solid colors (black, brown, or some light yellow
color), the black Lab cannot be heterozygous at any gene for recessive alleles that
specify non-solid colors. So, the Black Lab is most likely: EE or Ee, BB, (KbKb and
any gene A alleles) or (Kbky aa), DD, SS, M2M2.
The Chocolate Lab: A solid chocolate brown dog would be the same genotype
as the solid black animal, except bb.
The Yellow Lab: A solid yellow dog must not make eumelanin (ee). Any alleles of gene
B are possible, and as above, the dog must be DD, SS, and M2M2. The same
considerations for genes A and K apply as for the other Labs above. The yellow dog
pictured cannot be aa, however, or it would be white. Therefore, yellow labs are
ee, B– or bb, KbKb, any gene A alleles except aa, DD, SS, M2M2.
Genetics From Genes to Genomes 6th Edition hartwell Solutions Manual
Full Download: https://alibabadownload.com/product/genetics-from-genes-to-genomes-6th-edition-hartwell-solutions-manual/
This sample only, Download all chapters at: AlibabaDownload.com

Genetics From Genes to Genomes 6th Edition hartwell Solutions Manual

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Genetics From Genes to Genomes 6th Edition hartwell Solutions Manual

Similar to Genetics From Genes to Genomes 6th Edition hartwell Solutions Manual (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Genetics From Genes to Genomes 6th Edition hartwell Solutions Manual